Topic: 8th edition 5 years from now

[Lord Karnik]

I am on bored with the Magic issue.... there is no real down side to throwing a crap load of dice at a spell.  Certainly not for a slann who has the throne up.

As for Cav I think tehy stil have a place.  It only makes sense that if ranked units got bigger that the cav would also have to get bigger.  in this eddiion if you want a unit to break and run so you can start turning the battle in your favor then you need a strong flanking unit and I belive cav can still be this unit.

[phillyt]

Cavalry was never able to break ranked, trained infantry.  In the game, untrained infantry are represented with a lower leadership score and so run more often.

Warlord:  Concerning the boar boyz.  Yes, they were a 430 point unit, and defeated two units of 30 orcs, one with a BSB and the other had a 4th level orc shaman in it.  Two ranks of cavalry is nasty.  It is a pile of attacks and they can take plenty of hits and wounds while still remaining potent.

As for throwing 6 dice, fine.  If people are throwing the 6 dice then they they can only get two spells off per phase.  Look at the damage dwellers and purple sun will do and thats probably going to be about the same damage as 2 or 3 mortars tops.

Phil

[Uryens de Crux]

I dont think 8th ed will last 5 years fwiw.

But like 7th ed, the real test will come when the new army books start being released and those oh so problematic special rules (like ASF) that did the real damage in 7th

[Finlay]

The miscast table is horrible, how is that not a disinsentive for throwing loads of dice?

[warhammerlord_soth]

Throne of vines.

[oak_prince]

I had a mage kill 14 of the greatswords he was with on a miscast on Sunday. No doubt he was able to bluff his way out of a beheading by saying that it was the fault of the shaman in the goblin army. 

That said, there are some overlooked items that let a caster ignore their first miscast. There's a 20 point magic item in the High Elf army, for instance. 

[Lord Karnik]

I think as a lizard player msi cast do not bother me..... I typically have throne of Vines up or I have cupped hands so i can dish it off the first time.   But I think I might have to try a unit of 11 Cold one riders at some point and see how thy do??

[phillyt]

Lord Karnik, you really have to double check your posts.  You so often seem like a dyslexic 12 year old for whom english is a second language!



And thats coming from me, who makes constant speed typing mistakes.

Phil

[Wareagle]

I started with the 7th last fall after a break from the early days of the 5th edition and I think that the 7th was a game of elites. Few standard troops had a Chance against Chaos Warriors, Swordmasters, Black Guards and so on. The limits in numbers of characters gave the same outcome, vampires and the such kicked generals of the Empire around and the cheap characters was mainly there to raise the Ld of their troops. Dragons and monsters was used to bring Lords up to elite levels for a few armies and the lists that did not have access to good monsters had to stand back and put their fate in warmachines and shooting to diminish the numbers of the elite units.
The 8th edition seems to be a step towards hand to hand combat. All units has the Chance of killing everything they facing and hold against whatever they is killing them. I think that the 8th edition is going to be bloodier than the 4th edition with its killing machine characters and devastating magic.

Having re-started playing WHFB after almost 20 years break ( after 3rd. actually ) I can only subcribe to what Johedl said.
The few games a played with 8th. already gave a lot more fun then 7th.  and the "gut feeling" about my 3000 pts Armies ( Imps, Dawi, O&G, and WoC ) could be called "just about right" - as it should be. Having said this, I must admit, that I am by no means a tournament player, and their take will probably very different - but since I am playing in a club with a lot T-players, I can say that many are still quite positivwe on the changes.

Army composition now can still generate some very hard armies, but this is now true for many of the factions, not only few elites.

So how will WHFB look like when I am 56 ( in five years ) ? I hope not too much different then today. There are certainly a few points here and there, especially with regard to certain army books, and of course, with more experience, people will find out , which new issues hall be adressed in 9th. Maybe we see one or two new factions and maybe some changes in the existing factions ( new or changed existing troops / characters ).

However, I hope, that a kind of drastic change like from 7th. - to 8th. will not be necessary.

Most important is, that it should still provide enough fun to play it - afterall, that's what counts.

[xxvaderxx]

Too early to tell, so far basic rules are ok, things kind of blow up way to much for my taste, but it is still tolerable. As always, it will come down to army books. For once i would like special characters that are not completelly out of place in the game and that every tourny out there allows them not just the gw ones.
The one thing i am afraid of, is that this edition lends itself way too much to power gamming for my taste, but again, it will come down to army books.
Also, i am kind of afraid of games getting finished by turn 2-3, it kind of takes the fun out of it, and sadly, i read somewhere that is what GW is going for.

[TexasYankee]

Too early to tell, so far basic rules are ok, things kind of blow up way to much for my taste, but it is still tolerable. As always, it will come down to army books. For once i would like special characters that are not completelly out of place in the game and that every tourny out there allows them not just the gw ones.
The one thing i am afraid of, is that this edition lends itself way too much to power gamming for my taste, but again, it will come down to army books.
Also, i am kind of afraid of games getting finished by turn 2-3, it kind of takes the fun out of it, and sadly, i read somewhere that is what GW is going for.

Aye, true. I helped my daughter play her first game of warhammer with a 1500 point HE list against my buddy and his 1500 point VC list. Granted, it was his first 8th edition game, but he is a veteran gamer, and it was over in turn three. Every last one of his undead was annihilated, while my daughter only lost 4 Spearmen and 4 Reavers. I like to think that now that he understands 8th a little better, as good as he is, he'll build a list that can take HE in 8th Ed.

With Vampires, however, could we all agree that in 7th they were maybe 2nd or 3rd out of 15, and now they've dropped to about, what, 13th or 14th? Including the guy above, I know three Vamp players who have given up on Vamps for eighth, one of which won't even play his Chaos Warriors anymore after Kholek got spanked by a group Phoenix Guard buffed with the Mindrazor spell. I do see where many people think this is "Warhammer for Dummies" or power gaming. I believe the Warhammer "snobs" are very upset at 8th . . . me, I'm too busy loving the no-partial rule on templates to notice . . . 

[Finlay]

How does this edition lend itself to powergaming?

[Syn Ace]

Throne of vines.

I thought that too --- then rolled a bloody 1 the first time I miscast. And that was the only time i was able to get the damned spell off during the game. 


I also had a big unit of knights, buffed with a spell, chew up and spit out an infantry unit. It's awesome when you can hit them in the flank and they don't get supporting ranks.

[phillyt]

I am really not agreeing with the whole 'Warhammer for Dummies' concept.  The game wasn't that hard under 7th comparatively.  Everyone complains about how flanking has been reduced.  That was really all 7th was, and it wasn't that complicated.  Move a faster unit to a flank or get someone stuck in with an unbreakable unit.  Is that all that difficult?  No, not really.

At least now you need to KILL something.  Thats the name of the game.  Mass slaughter.  And I love it!

Phil

[TexasYankee]

How does this edition lend itself to powergaming?

The magic spells themselves are far more brutal, even if, with the new "winds of magic" you might just get enough dice to get only one spell off. We can now bring far more cannons and mortars, and with no more partials, very brutal.

I am really not agreeing with the whole 'Warhammer for Dummies' concept.  The game wasn't that hard under 7th comparatively.  Everyone complains about how flanking has been reduced.  That was really all 7th was, and it wasn't that complicated.  Move a faster unit to a flank or get someone stuck in with an unbreakable unit.  Is that all that difficult?  No, not really.

At least now you need to KILL something.  Thats the name of the game.  Mass slaughter.  And I love it!

Phil

The fact that you can measure anything at anytime lends itself to that. We've already discussed on other threads, being Empire players, that guess ranging our cannons really seperated the men from the boys, especialy those diagonal shots across the table. Now, not so much . . .

It also took a certain level of skill to guess that charge range, especialy with wheeling/turning/maximizing frontage, now it's just a matter of dicehammer.

Don't get me wrong, the game goes smoother and faster now, I think, without the near endless/almost game ending "no, you had to wheel that extra 1/2", so you're short/but I already measured that, so I'm not short" arguing in the middle of the game.

In the end, all that matters is, I enjoyed 7th, and now I'm enjoying 8th, just different rules . . . 

[warhammerlord_soth]

In the end, all that matters is, I enjoyed 7th, and now I'm enjoying 8th, just different rules . . . 

 

[Cularas]

In 5 years time, we'll probably either have or be looking forward to 9th edition which, if the pattern holds, will be a "tidying up" of 8th (i.e. edition 8.5).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How does this edition lend itself to powergaming?

Large Deathstar units will likely be the main recourse of powergamers - it's easier to reach the enemy lines than in 7th since avoidance/diversionary tactics aren't as viable and the enemy would have to wipe out the entire unit to score any VPs.  Magic and artillery can be very devastating (as TexasYankee points out) and the main tool for dealing with Deathstars: however, they are far less reliable and usually won't outright win you many games.

[Sejestephan]

I think there is a lot more balance in 8th edit. 7th was all about (as someone else said) flanking and luring, which is all well and good, apart from the fact that it was boooooooooring. I've always hated certain things about 7th that has been fixed, such as the front rank being killed so that you can't hit back, apparantly people just stood around and waited for the chaos warriors to chop up the guy in front of you.
2 ranks fighting also makes a lot of sense obviously meaning that infantry is good now, that's not the same thing as Cav sucks, cavalry still has it's place, especially our immortal 1+ cavalry, but they can't break a horde on their own, however in combination with a horde or smaller infantry unit they can be devastating ... much like lord of the rings when the Rohan Riders charge in the rear of the Orc hordes and wipes them.
The main problem with cavalry is the cost, 23 points for a knight is expensive, especially when the cost for your inf has upped, since you need so many guys, but in my games I've actually often found myself in a situation where I'd wish I had 9 knights with a priest to break of a unit in which my flaggies or halberdiers (or tank) was stuck.

The main change in 8th is that the game is agressive instead of passive, by that I mean you want your blocks to move across the field and kill things head on. In 7th you wanted to use your eagles to move units out of the way and into infavorable positions, sometimes to keep them out of the game for a couple of rounds. With the "free reform" when you wipe out a unit and almost impossible bait and flee changes you have to make an army that can actually either fight or move very fast. Wood elves, for instance took a great hit and I still consider them completely unplayable in 8th because a lot of their tactic was 7th edit reliable.
However I didn't win much with my woodies in 7th either, it was just that they where better at using a specific tactic than they are now, now they have to actually fight at some point instead of just running around in circles (and they can't really fight)

So the tiers of the armies have changed, leaving woodies and vampires near the bottom, while boosting all other armies (especially Empire, and even Tombkings)

For the magic ... well, to me it's awesome. I think dwellers below is over the top because it can be combined with throne of vines for a devastating effect on hordes, on the other hand, catching the wizard is easier now with the longer charge ranges, or if you think you'll be facing life just pick death and tear him apart with sniping spells. (this is hard to do with a Slann, but possible)

I'm not a big fan of TLoS, I liked the old system for LoS better since TLoS is subjective and thus always seems to be a way for players to disagree and stall the game. I don't like it in 40K and I don't like it in fantasy.

I hope that the game will evolve in this direction for the next 5 years, that the armybooks will be more balanced than they where in 7th and that all armies will be viable choices for tournaments.

[xxvaderxx]

I hope that the game will evolve in this direction for the next 5 years, that the armybooks will be more balanced than they where in 7th and that all armies will be viable choices for tournaments.

It would seem that it is heading that way, If you read this article on GWs site:
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?categoryId=&pIndex=0&aId=12400019a&start=1
It is basically an acknowledgment of everything everything that was wrong about 7th edition and that most ppl complained about. So at the very least they know that they fucked 7th up. Lets hope they dont repeat their own history.

This army composition system, lends itself way too much to power gaming, that is the sad truth about it. Having said that, there will always be ways to break any system thought by man, the way to check this is by the scenario system. The only real problem i see with this thus far, is that scenarios are not that different enough, you have 1 capture scenario, 1 weird banner scenario and 4 pitched battle scenarios. It would have been better if at the very least it would have been 2 for each, chances are you will end up playing the old pitched battle with different deployment rules, which would not have been an issue if flanking and rearcharging were as important as they were in the past.
Let me give an example from 40k, take IG with a multitude of core choices, thats awesome for Capture and Control but absolutely sucks for Kill points (as they are easily killed), now lets bring this to Fantasy, Lets think banners, there is no downside to having as many banners as possible (baring retarded choices as 10 man halberdiers with full command and no shields). There is no downside to having a 1k fenix guard unit with a MR(2) banner bunkering a lvl 4 Life/shadows Archmage with book of hothek (or what ever its name). This unit has ward save 2+ against magic, ward save 4+ and hits like a ton of bricks, it cost half your army, you dont get half its points, it does well in any scenario and you still need to kill it in all of them either for VP, to keep it from raiding the tower or for its breakpoints. This is just an example off the top of my head, i am sure there are way more optimal choices.

Bottom line, as always, it will come down to army books, my guess is that we will get a much clearer idea as to were things are heading with the release of the first 8th edition army book.

As for what many define this as the retarded Fantasy edition, i would have to agree, not for 1 thing in particular but for many that just add up a lot.

1- Steadfast is too powerfull, it should be cancelled if flanked, not being so diminishes the nessesity and tactical skill to flank.
2- Horde+Steadfast, makes it so that in many cases (if not most of them) you can substitute tactical skill for shear numbers.
3- Redirecting, is not only very unrealistic fluf/history wise (and i am not ussually one to complain about that) but it also removes the tactical component to screening and baitting.
4- +1 CR for charging in the world of "steadfast" and "step up" is borderline irrelevant.
There are some others but this are the ones that bother me the most.

[phillyt]

1- Steadfast is too powerfull, it should be cancelled if flanked, not being so diminishes the nessesity and tactical skill to flank.

I agree, if you manage to take the flank, it should cancel.  That said, I don't find units stay steadfast for long.  Most units that are relying on the rule are going to be consumed in a real combat.

2- Horde+Steadfast, makes it so that in many cases (if not most of them) you can substitute tactical skill for shear numbers.

In every case I have seen, horde units cannot maintain both steadfast AND horde for more than a single round.  They take too many wounds and must reform unless they have more than 60 models.

3- Redirecting, is not only very unrealistic fluf/history wise (and i am not ussually one to complain about that) but it also removes the tactical component to screening and baitting.

It isn't really any different than in 6th, just a little harder with the leadership test and all.

4- +1 CR for charging in the world of "steadfast" and "step up" is borderline irrelevant.
There are some others but this are the ones that bother me the most.

Well, I have found it valuable in my games, but maybe its just me.

Phil

[Batu]

The main thing 8th Edition will be remembered for was the Almost Edition.  8th edition is certainly different then 7th and emphasizes different aspects of the game.  But is it truly better?  Is it balanced?  Are all phases of the game no more dominating/devastating then another?   Almost...

They had some great Ideas...and almost fixed the game.  The initial talk was in balancing, at least around the stores here.  How GW would make the game balanced, fun and PDF the armies to remove/correct the aspects of certain armies that made them broken.  GW Almost did...but not quite and the PDF changes were mostly a superficial change with little or no impact.

7th Ed. was all about micro movement, combat and Combat resolution.  Shooting was mediocre, magic could do damage but could not destroy an enemy army in one turn.

8th Ed.  They removed the total focus on/from combat resolution and micro movement to large infantry blocks slugging it out over many turns and put it on Magic and to some degree shooting/artillery. 

The magic phase, unlike previous editions, can (and often does) absolutely dominate the battle field.  The ability for magic to decimate a unit or multiple units in a single phase is unbelievable. 

Artillery, with the indirect fire has now come into its own.  never before were artillery pieces as effective as they are in 8th Ed. (Rocket Battery being the assinine unit now)

While they did balance portions of the game, they did so while destroying balance in others.  Sure the DoC and VC are not the nastiest armies in the game, they simply moved that title to armies with decent infantry, superior magic defense and artillery. 

In steps our Empire.

So, looking back, it will be the edition that “Almost Was”...Balanced.
So, looking back, it will be the edition that “Almost Was”...Great.

[xxvaderxx]

It isn't really any different than in 6th, just a little harder with the leadership test and all.

Phil

You are right, it was almost if not the same in 6th, that being said, changing it back to 6th was a step back, a bad move, it removed a tactical aspect of the game, with out adding neither smothness of functionallity what so ever.

[phillyt]

Redirection is essential.  The removal of it in 7th simply made stupid situations happen where units couldn't carry through into units only an inch further than the enemy they just charged, which fled.

Phil

[Warlord]

Redirection is essential.  The removal of it in 7th simply made stupid situations happen where units couldn't carry through into units only an inch further than the enemy they just charged, which fled.

Agree. 7th ed pursuit made less sense, and was more just a rule that could be exploited by a canny general, than what would actually happen were the WHFB world a bit more real (realism is a bad argument in a Fantasy game, I know)

[Lord Karnik]

I hear a lot of emphasis placed on Magic, saying its over powered…….. But is it not true that magic is just that magic, calling for the elements and controlling a man making him do things he otherwise would not.  Sound pretty powerful to me.  Also I have watched a few games and the magic phase seems to be pretty even in rounds 1-3 if both players have taken a fairly even amount of magic.  It seems to start to tip the battle to the first player to gain the advantage IE killing an enemy wizard or  killing themselves with IR.

This actually make sense to me… once you have magic and the other player does not you should be able to turn the game in your favor.  I think the same could be said for War machines.  IF you have them and your opponent does not why would you charge across the field on turn 1 and lose an advantage you have?

So I guess I agree that magic is more powerful but I do not think unbalanced, especially as units are moving across the board much faster with the new charge rules